Cited by 77Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentDecision-Making and Behavioral Economics

Multiple accounts of adolescent impulsivity

Open access
Steinberg, Laurence, Chein, Jason M.·2015·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Adults have been concerned about adolescent impetuosity for centuries. The rashness of youth has been blamed for many teenage indiscretions, from juvenile delinquency to unprotected sex and substance use. At the turn of the 21st century, research on the development of self-control in adolescence added functional brain imaging as a complement to behavioral tasks and self-report questionnaires, but the essential question has remained the same: Why do teenagers have so much difficulty controlling their impulses? As a report in PNAS by van den Bos et al. (1) attests, the question continues to be of interest. Although we discuss some potential limitations, the study these authors describe adeptly and cleverly incorporates the broad armamentarium of tools, including self-report, behavior, brain function, and both structural and functional connectivity measures, to move us toward a more complete answer to the question.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1073/pnas.1509732112

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mid-adolescents (14-17) and older adolescents (18-21) learned to play from advantageous decks faster than younger adolescents (10-13) or adults (22-25).

    “The results indicated that mid-adolescents aged 14–17 and older adolescents aged 18–21 learned to play from advantageous decks faster than either younger adolescents (ages 10–13) or adults (ages 22–25), a finding that was recently replicated in an international sample of more than 5000 individuals (Steinberg and Chein, 2015).”

    From The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation (2016) · cites this paper as Steinberg and Chein, 2015

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Steinberg, L., & Chein, J. M.
Affiliations
Temple University (US)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2015-07-06
Volume
112
Issue
29
Pages
8807-8808
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1905554499
Cited by
77
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
FWCI
9.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
Keywords
adolescent impulsivity, impulsivity, developmental trajectories, multiple accounts

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review